"Steve Howe" <howe@carcass.dhs.org> writes:
>> The group array is a hack but the pg_proc array would be hard to replace
>> becauseit acts as part of the unique key used for cache lookups.
> This design itself bothers me.
> We have no other option left ? Like arrays being referenced in relations ?
Sure, it *could* be done another way. As far as pg_proc goes, I agree
with Bruce: there are far too many places that know the existing
representation for us to consider changing it. The pain involved would
vastly outweigh any possible benefit.
The representation of groups is not so widely known, however. We could
probably get away with changing it, if someone wanted to propose a
better catalog schema and do the legwork to make it happen.
regards, tom lane